tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post6713867896714419435..comments2015-07-28T19:30:42.550-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: On Calling Oneself 'Atheist'Alonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-30433472971362033492007-10-23T05:35:00.000-06:002007-10-23T05:35:00.000-06:00Hi Alonzo. What the religious zealots rely on is f...Hi Alonzo. What the religious zealots rely on is fear of what's new and strange. The thing is that most of the population are 'don't cares'. The only reason they have an opinion on atheism is that they are fearful of anything that differs from the established order - most people are inherently reactionary and conservative.<BR/><BR/>The reason that this state is perpetuated is that most people in the US never knowingly come cross an atheist. Similarly, in the past, jews and blacks were kept segregated, which allowed suspicions to grow and allowed the bigots to perpetuate fear.<BR/><BR/>There is really only one way around this. And that's social conditioning - make what seems new and weird commonplace and ordinary. So once blacks and jew and gays took part in white christian society, they became less frightening. Ordinary people realised that they were "just like us", and so zealots couldn't play the fear card any more.<BR/><BR/>It's a long slow process, but it's had a tremendous lift from the recent books. Now's the time to capitalise on them!Tom Reeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05420404206189437710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-16103032093250211172007-10-19T05:51:00.000-06:002007-10-19T05:51:00.000-06:00Tom RossI believe that empirical evidence speaks a...<B>Tom Ross</B><BR/><BR/>I believe that empirical evidence speaks against the idea that, "If they just knew who we atheists were, they would love us."<BR/><BR/>People had no idea identifying blacks during the slave trade and the Jim Crow laws. Germans in 1930 and 1940 had no trouble identifying blacks. The ability to identify people specifically as Armenian in 1915-1917, or Native American, did not prevent the widespread slaughter of these people.<BR/><BR/>In fact, the Nazis insisted on outing Jews (by forcing them to wear identifying marks on their clothes) knowing that this will have no affect on the hatred they generated against Jews.<BR/><BR/>The Pledge of Allegiance (with the invitation to sit it out) serves the same role in America today as the star of david in Germany. Its purpose is to identify (or 'out') those who do not share the socially accepted view about God so that public pressure can be put against them to change.<BR/><BR/>The WANT atheists (particularly atheist children) to be outed so that social pressure can be more efficiently used against them.<BR/><BR/>This does not imply that I am against the campaign. After all, I publically identify myself as an atheist. However, I believe that a lot of people who pride themselves on living in the real world are putting blinders on when they think that this 'out' campaign will significantly affect public perception of atheists.Alonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-25706669236159791422007-10-19T05:05:00.000-06:002007-10-19T05:05:00.000-06:00PS The Out Campaign: http://outcampaign.org/PS The Out Campaign: http://outcampaign.org/Tom Reeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05420404206189437710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-39050329106866325472007-10-19T05:02:00.000-06:002007-10-19T05:02:00.000-06:00As more and more people stand up and declare thems...As more and more people stand up and declare themselves to be atheist, the word will lose its shock value. It'll take time but it happened in Europe (I'm from the UK). I think it's wrong to change terminology reactively<BR/><BR/>Alternatively, many athiests (even in the UK) prefer to call themselves humanist, because atheist says what you are not, but humanist says what you are. It's a positive thing, not a negative. thing.Tom Reeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05420404206189437710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-65685101488767929502007-10-14T18:42:00.000-06:002007-10-14T18:42:00.000-06:00Harris acts like this hasn't been done before. Loo...Harris acts like this hasn't been done before. Look at what happened to the word 'liberal.' Running away from it hasn't changed anything. All it's done is further cement that idea that being a 'liberal' is bad because even the liberals are running away from it! <BR/><BR/>The same result will occur by trying to abandon 'atheist.' People won't care. They'll just go, 'Oh, those atheists are calling themselves X now. Heh, damn atheists.'Vincenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09880614941783123381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-35793021412077928722007-10-11T12:34:00.000-06:002007-10-11T12:34:00.000-06:00I was pretty excited about Harris' challenge.Elite...I was pretty excited about Harris' challenge.<BR/><BR/>Elites/the powers-that-be OWN the term. They have defined it and it is in their pocket. We're not going to "take it back," if Paine or Ingersoll - two of the nation's most beloved atheists - even "had it" in the first place.<BR/><BR/>So I think you guys are a little naive here. The word is spoiled, and luckily we don't have to cling to it for our good ideas to have uniformity, and continue to devastate bad ones.<BR/><BR/>I think PZ Myers is incredibly misguided and his obnoxious blog is nothing more than an echo chamber, a perpetual pat-on-the-back. He doesn't hate religion, he loves it; without it he would have to kiss his beloved identity goodbye: that of a presiding leader of the "enlightened smart people club," that of an "atheist." As far as we can get from that method, the more effective we'll be.Our hidden placehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08808302225778972028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-6810826959239622007-10-10T20:14:00.000-06:002007-10-10T20:14:00.000-06:00Yes, lets call ourselves atheists. Especially if ...Yes, lets call ourselves atheists. Especially if you conduct yourself in public in a respectful and friendly manner. Do the other things Sam Harris recommended, but not the part about not calling yourself an atheist.<BR/>Calling yourself an atheist allows you to represent yourself, as opposed to what happens in Alonzo's scenario, where our opponents misrepresent us.Sheldonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03743116454273042629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-31762478147408465022007-10-10T19:52:00.000-06:002007-10-10T19:52:00.000-06:00I say we keep embracing the name. I was flushed wi...I say we keep embracing the name. I was flushed with pride the first time I finally admitted that I was an ATHEIST in public. <BR/><BR/>It ruins the negativity if the culture embraces it. Look at other examples of negative name-association in society, and how the evil has been taken out of it by the very minority the name targets.<BR/><BR/>My 2 cents...Neil Phalanxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11724312676809556291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-66729794478085690582007-10-09T23:42:00.000-06:002007-10-09T23:42:00.000-06:00"Atheist" for the religious right does not even me..."Atheist" for the religious right does not even mean atheist. It means heretic, which is different. Fundamenatlists told Jimmy Carter while he was president that they wished he would abandon his religion of secular humanism. Justice Hugo Black received hate mail calling him an atheist for ruling against prayer in school.<BR/><BR/>The term, historically, has been used not against genuine atheists but against unorthodox believers.Hume's Ghosthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13551684109760430351noreply@blogger.com